Just a quick note to Ed and Amer,
You two were right on, with this. I took the plunge and re-thought my db as
you both suggested. Sage advice, as successive queries and relationships
have been much easier to achieve with the new allocation table. It's clear
to see that this method also will offer
Hi :)
I'm not even sure if I'm naming the question correctly. I hope I can
ask/explain it clearly enough to get a hint ;)
Essentially...
1) I have a table of portfolio 'pieces', each row of which has a unique ID
2) I have a table of 'projects', which are comprised of a number of
'pieces'.
I'm not even sure if I'm naming the question correctly. I hope I can
ask/explain it clearly enough to get a hint ;)
Essentially...
1) I have a table of portfolio 'pieces', each row of which has a unique ID
2) I have a table of 'projects', which are comprised of a number of
'pieces'.
On Monday, August 11, 2003, at 11:06 AM, Verdon vaillancourt wrote:
2) I have a table of 'projects', which are comprised of a number of
'pieces'. There is a column in this projects table called 'pieces',
which
contains a delimitated string of all the 'pieces' related to that
'project',
in the
Thanks to both Ed and Amer for the excellent suggestions.
This is definitely the time in my project for db changes :) I think you've
both nailed what fundamental I was missing. In the long run, a bit of
re-thinking now will simplify a lot down the road.
Ed, sorry to be so dense, but by PK field
